What's New

Resources updated between Monday, September 29, 2014 and Sunday, October 05, 2014

October 3, 2014

Alan Henning

"Islamic State militants on Friday claimed the beheading of a British aid worker and suggested an American hostage may be killed next, in what they said was retaliation for the U.S.-led campaign against the group. The killing of Alan Henning would be the fourth beheading of a Western hostage by the jihadist group, beginning with the killing of American journalist James Foley in August. The militants, also known as ISIL, made their announcement in a gruesome one-minute video released Friday, according to the SITE Intelligence Group, a research group that monitors jihadist websites. The video came days after Britain's Parliament authorized military action against Islamic State, followed by the Royal Air Force's participation in the U.S.-led fight against the extremist group. The U.K. Foreign Office said it was trying to confirm the video's veracity, while British Prime Minister David Cameron said 'the brutal murder of Alan Henning by ISIL shows just how barbaric and repulsive these terrorists are.'"

Makarim Wibisono, new UN expert on the "situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967"

Meet Makarim Wibisono of Indonesia. He's the new UN expert on the "situation of human rights in the Palestinian territories occupied since 1967," the post filled for the past six years by the notorious antisemite Richard Falk. Wibisono was the ambassador of Indonesia to the UN from 2004 until 2008. Indonesia is a country that does not recognize Israel's right to exist.

In a 2006 statement to the new Human Rights Council, Ambassador Wibisono, described Israel as showing "ruthless contempt for the lives of the innocent," perpetrating "callous attacks against terrorized and defenseless civilians," among other things. His biography touts that until January 2014 he was "active in the private sector as an advisor to the Third World Network." Third World Network is a non-governmental organization that specializes in hysterical antisemitic vitriol, including: Israel is guilty of "bestiality, barbarity," pays "cash and other perks" for "towing the Zionist line,"and "the US plays the role of God in modern times" holding "back the sun to enable Israel...to finish the job" against its Arab victims.

In his new capacity as a UN-certified "expert," Wibisono has undertaken his first trip to the region. He visited Amman, Jordan and Cairo, Egypt, and interviewed people in Gaza via video and telephone. He then issued a press release about his alleged discoveries. Israel does not cooperate with the UN "expert," chosen for his or her expertise in peddling Palestinian propaganda, and he is therefore not permitted to enter either Gaza or the West Bank.

Wibisono did not disappoint his masters on the UN Human Rights Council - the states that appointed him and which will decide on whether his term-of-office will be renewed. His press release claims to cover the time between 12 June and 31 August 2014. But it never mentions the kidnapping and murder by Hamas operatives of the Israeli teens Eyal Yifrach, Gilad Shaar and Naftali Frankel. It never mentions Hamas rocket attacks on Israel. It never mentions the 32 terror tunnels Hamas built for the sole purpose of killing Jews. He mentions Palestinian children and never Israeli children. He says nothing about Hamas' use of the Palestinian civilian population as human shields. He never mentions Hamas' use of hospitals and UN schools and other civilian structures for military purposes - all war crimes.

What Wibisono did claim, is that Israel has no right of self-defense: "Israel's claim of self-defense ... is untenable." Having decided that, of course Israel was guilty of violating international law.

As far as the UN "Human Rights" Council (recently labeled by Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu as the "Terrorists Rights Council") is concerned, he's off to a great start.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech on September 29, 2014, to the General Assembly was a plea for sanity. The inmates in the insane asylum may not have been listening, but the shofar needed to be blown. The statement was a clarion call to democracies to pull back from enabling a nuclear-armed Iran, from allowing antisemitism to flourish in their midst, and to understand the price that must be paid if freedom and human decency is to prevail in our world and in our time.

The speech included the following:

"By investigating Israel rather than Hamas for war crimes, the UN Human Rights Council has betrayed its noble mission to protect the innocent. In fact, what it's doing is to turn the laws of war upside-down. Israel, which took unprecedented steps to minimize civilian casualties, Israel is condemned. Hamas, which both targeted and hid behind civilians - that a double war crime - Hamas is given a pass. The Human Rights Council is thus sending a clear message to terrorists everywhere: Use civilians as human shields. Use them again and again and again. You know why? Because sadly, it works. By granting international legitimacy to the use of human shields, the UN's Human Rights Council has thus become a Terrorist Rights Council, and it will have repercussions. It probably already has, about the use of civilians as human shields."

"We live in a world steeped in tyranny and terror, where gays are hanged from cranes in Tehran, political prisoners are executed in Gaza, young girls are abducted en masse in Nigeria and hundreds of thousands are butchered in Syria, Libya and Iraq. Yet nearly half, nearly half of the UN Human Rights Council's resolutions focusing on a single country have been directed against Israel, the one true democracy in the Middle East - Israel. where issues are openly debated in a boisterous parliament, where human rights are protected by independent courts and where women, gays and minorities live in a genuinely free society. The Human Rights - that's an oxymoron, the UN Human Rights Council, but I'll use it just the same - the Council's biased treatment of Israel is only one manifestation of the return of the world's oldest prejudices."

"We hear mobs today in Europe call for the gassing of Jews. We hear some national leaders compare Israel to the Nazis. This is not a function of Israel's policies. It's a function of diseased minds. And that disease has a name. It's called antisemitism. It is now spreading in polite society, where it masquerades as legitimate criticism of Israel. For centuries the Jewish people have been demonized with blood libels and charges of deicide. Today, the Jewish state is demonized with the apartheid libel and charges of genocide. Genocide? In what moral universe does genocide include warning the enemy's civilian population to get out of harm's way? Or ensuring that they receive tons, tons of humanitarian aid each day, even as thousands of rockets are being fired at us? Or setting up a field hospital to aid for their wounded? Well, I suppose it's the same moral universe where a man who wrote a dissertation of lies about the Holocaust, and who insists on a Palestine free of Jews, Judenrein, can stand at this podium and shamelessly accuse Israel of genocide and ethnic cleansing."

"ISIS and Hamas are branches of the same poisonous tree. ISIS and Hamas share a fanatical creed, which they both seek to impose well beyond the territory under their control. Listen to ISIS's self-declared caliph, Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi. This is what he said two months ago: 'A day will soon come when the Muslim will walk everywhere as a master... The Muslims will cause the world to hear and understand the meaning of terrorism... and destroy the idol of democracy.' Now listen to Khaled Meshaal, the leader of Hamas. He proclaims a similar vision of the future: 'We say this to the West... By Allah you will be defeated. Tomorrow our nation will sit on the throne of the world.' As Hamas's charter makes clear, Hamas's immediate goal is to destroy Israel. But Hamas has a broader objective. They also want a caliphate. Hamas shares the global ambitions of its fellow militant Islamists. That's why its supporters wildly cheered in the streets of Gaza as thousands of Americans were murdered on 9/11. And that's why its leaders condemned the United States for killing Osama Bin Laden, whom they praised as a holy warrior. So when it comes to their ultimate goals, Hamas is ISIS and ISIS is Hamas."

"Militant Islam's ambition to dominate the world seems mad. But so too did the global ambitions of another fanatic ideology that swept to power eight decades ago.The Nazis believed in a master race. The militant Islamists believe in a master faith. They just disagree about who among them will be the master... of the master faith."

"Therefore, the question before us is whether militant Islam will have the power to realize its unbridled ambitions. There is one place where that could soon happen: The Islamic State of Iran. For 35 years, Iran has relentlessly pursued the global mission which was set forth by its founding ruler, Ayatollah Khomeini, in these words: 'We will export our revolution to the entire world. Until the cry "There is no God but Allah" will echo throughout the world over...' And ever since, the regime's brutal enforcers, Iran's Revolutionary Guards, have done exactly that....Iran's President Rouhani stood here last week, and shed crocodile tears over what he called "the globalization of terrorism." Maybe he should spare us those phony tears and have a word instead with the commanders of Iran's Revolutionary Guards. He could ask them to call off Iran's global terror campaign, which has included attacks in two dozen countries on five continents since 2011 alone...This bemoaning of the Iranian president of the spread of terrorism has got to be one of history's greatest displays of doubletalk".

"Imagine how much more dangerous the Islamic State, ISIS, would be if it possessed chemical weapons. Now imagine how much more dangerous the Islamic state of Iran would be if it possessed nuclear weapons...Once Iran produces atomic bombs, all the charm and all the smiles will suddenly disappear. ... ISIS must be defeated. But to defeat ISIS and leave Iran as a threshold nuclear power is to win the battle and lose the war."

Gay rights activists march with flags and placards during a May Day rally in St. Petersburg, Russia on May 1, 2014.

On September 26, 2014 the UN Human Rights Council adopted a resolution on sexual orientation and gender identity which the Obama administration praised as "an historic statement in support of LGBT rights". However, the text was significantly weakened from prior drafts, including by removing the reference to the UN's own campaign for LGBT equality and deleting a requirement for regular reporting on the subject.

This is only the second resolution adopted by the UN's top human rights body attempting to deal with sexual orientation and gender identity. In 2011 the Council adopted the first resolution which commissioned a "study" and a panel discussion. The 2011 report refused to name the worst abusers of LGBT rights - countries which criminalize homosexual acts with the death penalty. These states are Iran, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Yemen and Mauritania.

The panel discussion held by the Council in March 2012 was boycotted by Islamic states, while the African group "reject[d] categorically any attempt to impose ... such concept" and the Arab group "absolutely opposed the so-called concept of sexual orientation.

In order to pass at all, changes in the final version of the text ultimately adopted in September included:

The resolution only requests the High Commissioner to submit an "update" to the 2011 report in June 2015. The first draft called for regular reporting, a "report thereon to the Council every 2 years."

The resolution calls for an updated report without specifically identifying its purpose as addressing sexual orientation and gender identity. It describes the 2015 report as being about "sharing good practices and ways to overcome violence and discrimination." An earlier draft of the resolution - opposed by Islamic states - called for a report addressing "discriminatory laws and practices and acts of violence against individuals based on their sexual orientation and gender identity."

At the behest of Islamic states, the purpose of the commissioned report in 2015 was also circumscribed by the words: "good practices and ways to overcome violence and discrimination, in application of existing international human rights law and standards." They will undoubtedly proceed to insist that existing standards do not include LGBT rights.

Efforts by Islamic states to weaken the resolution further, through a series of amendments, failed. The resolution was finally adopted with 25 votes in favor, 14 against and 7 abstentions. Not a single Muslim state supported LGBT equality or voted in favor of the resolution. Pakistan speaking for the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) said: "We do not support certain notions promoted through this forum...Sexual orientation concept can be detrimental to our societies and youth as a whole...We Muslims believe our religious and cultural values should be respected."

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu chose not to let President Obama's bold allegation that Israelis were not interested in peace go unanswered in his speech Monday at the UN. "Brazen lies spoken from this very podium against my country" is how Netanyahu described the remarks of previous speakers, when he addressed the U.N. General Assembly.

Just five days earlier, President Obama had made a shocking assertion in his role as president while speaking on the world stage. He claimed that there were "too many Israelis ready to abandon the hard work of peace." Obama scolded: "that's something worthy of reflection within Israel."

Not only did President Obama not include Palestinians in this demeaning and defamatory slur, he proceeded to equate "rockets fired at innocent Israelis" with "Palestinian children taken from us in Gaza." Not "taken from us" by Hamas who used them as human fodder in their attempted annihilation of Israel. But apparently "taken from us" by those Israelis not interested in peace.

No Israeli Prime Minister could allow such an attack to go unanswered. And so Netanyahu began his remarks by daring President Obama to distinguish between his battle against ISIS and Israel's battle with Hamas.

Said Netanyahu: "the people of Israel pray for peace, but our hopes and the world's hopes for peace are in danger because everywhere we look militant Islam in on the march."

The stark contrast between the two world leaders also could not have been more clear on the subject of Iran.

President Obama spent five sentences of his 39-minute UN address on Iran, telling the world "my message to Iran's leaders...We can reach a solution that meets your energy needs while assuring the world that your program is peaceful."

Another brazen lie, since no one believes that Iran's nuclear program is peaceful or has anything to do with its energy needs, which can be met into the next century by its natural resources.

Netanyahu instead pointed – yet again – to the terrifying threat of the acquisition of the world's most dangerous weapon by the world's most dangerous country and the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism.

He challenged the president, and the global community, "to disarm ISIS but leave Iran with the bomb would be to win the battle but lose the war."

Sitting stone-faced in her seat, was the woman holding the bag on Obama's obsequious Iran policy, America's ambassador to the UN: Samantha Power.

Israeli Prime Minister's message Monday came as Palestinian leaders are vying to remain the U.N.'s favorite victim amidst the headless human carcasses now piling up in Iraq, Syria, the United Kingdom, Algeria, and the United States.

No doubt, Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud Abbas has something to worry about. It's a tough sell to differentiate the Hamas partner in his unity government – an organization dedicated to the kidnapping, murder and execution of both Israelis and Palestinians en route to Islamic domination – from ISIS, Al Nusra, Al Qaeda and company.

So Israel's "peace partner" evidently decided the way forward was not to eschew Islamic fanaticism but to embrace it.

In one of the most vitriolic speeches ever delivered by a Palestinian leader at the U.N., Abbas accused Israel on Friday, September 26 of "genocide," of practicing "an abhorrent form of apartheid," and of "state terrorism." He analogized Israelis to Nazis with Palestinians living in "ghettos" and claimed the rise of ISIS was Israel's fault since Israel was a "source of terrorism" and a "breeding ground for incitement..."

Netanyahu called the assertions something derived from "the moral universe" of "a man who wrote a dissertation of lies about the Holocaust and who insists on a Palestine free of Jews."

Unfortunately, plain talk at the U.N. is as unwelcome as it is unusual.

Even more unfortunate is a president of the United States who sounds warmer when talking about Iran than about Israel.

"Iran has upheld its decision to execute Rayhaneh Jabbari, charged with the murder of a man who allegedly attempted to rape her.
Jabbari, 26, spent seven years in prison and her execution by hanging could be carried out as early as tomorrow (Tuesday, 30 September), according to local reports.
Jabbari was arrested in 2007, after she had killed a member of the Iranian Intelligence Services, Morteza Abdolali Sarbandi, who she said tried to rape her."

Alfred de Zayas, UN "Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order"

Cuba lined up some of the world's worst human rights violators - China, North Korea, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Sri Lanka, "Palestine", Sudan and Venezuela - and pushed through a UN resolution on an "equitable international order."

The resolution of the UN Human Rights Council was adopted on September 26, 2014 against the wishes of democratic states. The vote was 29 in favor and 14 against including the U.S. and the European Union.

Notwithstanding the defeat, the U.S. will now pay 22% of the cost for the position of "Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order." The position was first created in 2011 and this latest resolution extends the mandate for another three years.

What prompted the human rights abusing crowd to get behind the position and push?
In his most recent report, expert Alfred de Zayas takes direct aim at the U.S. and its military spending in particular, criticizing it as antithetical to an equitable international order. Instead, de Zayas promotes "reducing military spending" and "resourcing...the global climate change challenge."

ISIS will apparently take care of itself.

Enthusiastic about the de Zayas report was Iran and the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC). Speaking on behalf of the OIC on September 10, 2014, Pakistan said: "the OIC welcomes the report...we strongly believe that staggering military expenditures and heavy investment in the production of armed drones and autonomous lethal weapons have an adverse impact on the enjoyment of rights..."

Iran, currently spending its country's precious resources to acquire nuclear weapons, told the Council on September 10: "On the report...we appreciate his preliminary study on the adverse impacts of military spending in which he has stressed the need for disarmament...We share also the idea...that nuclear arsenals are anachronisms... "

Crowds dispersed after police fired tear gas on pro-democracy demonstrators near the Hong Kong government headquarters on Sunday

"Police used pepper spray and tear gas to disperse pro-democracy protesters in the city's most serious confrontation with Beijing in more than a decade.
Roads were blocked and some schools and offices were closed Monday morning as protests spread to other neighborhoods in the city. Police stopped using tear gas late in the night and tried negotiating with protesters but crowds remained in several locations...
The Hong Kong government said Monday morning that riot police were withdrawn after peace was restored among protesters.
The escalation of the protests-centered on Beijing's decision to impose limits on how Hong Kong elects its leader-threatens to strain relations with Beijing which controls Hong Kong under an arrangement called one country, two systems. Beijing has taken a hard line over the brewing dispute over democracy in Hong Kong, issuing warnings to protest organizers and pushing business leaders to support its stance, allowing universal suffrage but only allowing people to vote for preapproved candidates."

Mahmoud Abbas, whom the UN designates as the President of the "State of Palestine," delivered his most incendiary speech yet at the opening of the UN's new session.

On September 26, 2014 Abbas analogized Israelis to Nazis, referred to the creation of Israel as an "historic injustice" and "catastrophe," blamed Israel - as a terrorist "breeding ground" - for ISIL atrocities, praised "Boycott Divestment Sanctions" (BDS) campaign and repeatedly accused Israel of "genocide", "war crimes," "apartheid," "racism," and the deliberate murder of children. He received loud applause throughout his speech.

His words included the following:

The future proposed by the Israeli government for the Palestinian people is at best isolated ghettos for Palestinians ... which will be under the subjugation of the racist settlers and army of occupation, and at worst will be a most abhorrent form of Apartheid...

In this year, in which this Assembly...conveyed the world's yearning and determination to realize a just peace that achieves freedom and independence for the Palestinian people in their State of Palestine alongside Israel in order to rectify the historic injustice inflicted on the Palestinian people in Al-Nakba of 1948, the occupying Power has chosen to defy the entire world by launching its war on Gaza, by which its jets and tanks brutally assassinated lives and devastated the homes, schools and dreams of thousands of Palestinian children, women and men ...

Israel has chosen to make it a year of a new war of genocide perpetrated against the Palestinian people...

Confronting the terrorism that plagues our region by groups - such as "ISIL" and others ... requires much more than military confrontation ... What is primarily needed is a comprehensive, credible strategy to dry out the sources of terrorism and eradicate its roots ... It requires, in this context and as a priority, bringing an end to the Israeli occupation of our country, which constitutes in its practices and perpetuation, an abhorrent form of state terrorism and a breeding ground for incitement, tension and hatred...

We witnessed the qualitative and quantitative broadening of activities of the international grassroots boycott campaign against Israel's policies of occupation, apartheid and colonial settlement, especially among academia, cultural, student and youth groups... We pay tribute to...All of these manifestations of true solidarity [which] constituted an important message to those who were facing genocide in Gaza...

I have addressed you in this hall during similar days in 2012 and cautioned that the colonial occupying Power was preparing for a new Nakba against the Palestinian people, and I appealed to you: Prevent a new Nakba. Support the establishment of a free and independent State of Palestine now. I returned to this same hall two months later as Palestine was healing her wounds and her people were burying beloved martyred children, women and men...

The difference today is that the scale of this genocidal crime is larger, and that the list of martyrs, especially children, is longer, as well as lists of the wounded and disabled, and that dozens of families have been completely decimated...

This last war against Gaza was a series of absolute war crimes...

I affirm in front of you that the Palestinian people hold steadfast to their legitimate right to defend themselves against the Israeli war machine and to their legitimate right to resist this colonial, racist Israeli occupation...

By the way, this is the same Abbas who claims he wants to live side-by-side in peace and mutual respect with Israel.

A checkpoint manned by Shiite Muslim rebels near the United States Embassy in Sana. An affiliate of Al Qaeda said it fired a rocket toward the embassy on September 27, 2014.

The UN's top human rights body, the Human Rights Council, adopted a resolution on human rights in Yemen by consensus - which includes the United States, a member of the Council - on September 26, 2014. Despite the fact that Yemen has an abysmal human rights record - ranked lowest on the Freedom House scale as "not free" - the Council has gone to extraordinary lengths to praise the country.

The text was adopted several days after Shiite militants seized control over much of Yemen's capital and the U.S. State Department began removing some of its diplomats from U.S. facilities and advised Americans living there to leave the country.

The text of the resolution is entitled "Technical assistance and capacity building for Yemen in the field of human rights." It includes such language as: " The Human Rights Council... Welcomes... the commitment of the government of Yemen to fully promote and protect human rights...Welcomes the measures of the government of Yemen to end the recruitment and the use of children...Notes with appreciation the considerable representation of women...Looks forward to the Government continuing its efforts to promote and protect human rights... Reiterates the commitments and obligations of the government of Yemen to promote and protect human rights".

"The most significant human rights problems were arbitrary killings and acts of violence committed by the government and various entities and groups; disappearances and kidnappings; and a weak and corrupt judicial system that did not ensure the rule of law... The government still enforced restrictions on coverage of security and military related events, confiscated newspapers, and harassed journalists... Other human rights problems included: torture and other cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment; poor prison conditions; arbitrary arrest and detention; lengthy pretrial detention... Impunity was persistent and pervasive...Child Soldiers:...persons under age 18 reportedly directly participated in armed conflict during the year for government, tribal, and militant forces...Most rape victims did not report the crime due to fear of shaming the family, incurring violent retaliation, or being prosecuted...According to the law, without a confession the [rape] victim must provide four male witnesses to the crime... Violence against women and children was considered a family affair and usually went unreported to police... The testimony of one man equates to that of two women... A close male relative has the authority to approve or prohibit a female citizen's travel... A husband may divorce a wife without justifying the action in court...The law does not define or prohibit child abuse...There was no minimum age of marriage...The penal code criminalizes consensual same-sex sexual conduct, with the death penalty as a sanction, under the country's interpretation of Islamic law."

What do a state that is currently committing mass murder against its own people, and the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism, have in common? Syria and Iran both champion the UN Human Rights Council's activities on the "right to peace."

On September 26, 2014 the UN Council adopted the Cuban-led draft resolution entitled the "Promotion of the right to peace."

Back in July 2012, the Council established a so-called "working group" of governments to draft a Declaration on the Right to Peace. The worst human right abusers have been very enthusiastic about the "right to peace."

The group's first session in February 2013 included:

Syria: "We all agree that the right to peace is not only a basic and necessary right, but is in fact inseparable from the most fundamental right, which is the right to life."
Iran: "The exercise of the right to peace and its promotion demands policies towards the elimination of the threat of war, particularly nuclear war, the renunciation of the use of threat of use of force in international relations..."
Venezuela: "The true enjoyment of the right to peace, the fulfillment of its effective application, unites us again, to confront those who, nowadays, reclaim the right to war, their principle instrument of domination."

The resolution adopted on September 26 perpetuates the spectacle of countries engaged in violence using the UN to feign an interest in non-violence. The resolution grants the working group another five days of meetings in 2015, and asks the group to finalize the Declaration.

The text was adopted with the support of the overwhelming majority of Council members - despite U.S. objections. 33 votes in favor, 5 abstentions and 9 against (including the United States.)

Against the wishes of the United States and the European Union, on September 27, 2014 the UN Human Rights Council created a new job - called the "Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights." The more than 2 million dollars over 3 years will be paid almost entirely by the taxpayers of the United States and the European Union.

The push for the new position came from Iran, the president of the so-called Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) which is composed of 120 of the 193 members of the UN.

"Unilateral coercive measures" is a shifting term that can refer to economic measures such as embargoes and sanctions, opposed of course by the targeted states. Targeted states like Iran.

The Obama administration team at the Council session in Geneva attempted to defeat the move by way of a procedural maneuver. But if failed miserably, as the U.S. amendment deleting the post was rejected by a margin of 2 to 1.

Cuba played an active role, calling on all countries "which support ending the US embargo of Cuba" to reject the American amendment and vote in favor of the resolution.

The American amendment received 15 votes in favor (including the US and the EU), 30 against and two abstentions.

Once the U.S. amendment was defeated, 66% of Council members voted in favor of the final resolution on "human rights and unilateral coercive measures." Supporters included such countries as Cuba, China, Pakistan, Russia, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates and Venezuela.

On September 26, 2014 the UN Human Rights Council adopted a resolution on foreign debt. The push for the resolution came from states with some of the world's worst human rights situations, like Algeria, China, Cuba, Lebanon, Pakistan, Russian Federation, China, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Venezuela.

The point was to claim "foreign debt and other related international financial obligations of States" hurt "the full enjoyment of all human rights, particularly economic, social and cultural rights." According to the resolution, "the unjust nature of the current system... directly affects the enjoyment of human rights in debtor States " and "Encourages all States to participate in the negotiations aimed at establishing a multilateral legal framework for sovereign debt restructuring processes."

The text was adopted - against American wishes - by an overwhelming number of Council members. There were 33 votes in favor, 9 abstentions and 5 against (the U.S., the U.K., Czech Republic, Germany, Japan).